Re: The Holy Wars -- LAME! (LONG)

[Jill Burgchardt <jburgcha -at- PESTILENCE -dot- ITC -dot- NRCS -dot- USDA -dot- GOV>]

I'm reluctant to endorse Andy's approach to the Word/Frame holy war. If all of
his perceptions were accurate, something needed to be done. But how many
of us have been in work situations where a "consultant god" has created
horrible problems for other people to deal with? Too often, one may come
in with preconceived biases that affect recommendations. Or, unaware of an
extended evaluation process that came up with the current setup, a
consultant will change it to something that didn't work in the past.

I'm not saying that's the case in this instance. If Word truly meets the
documentation requirements that writer faces and his work must interface
with that of other Word users, then the writer should comply.

However, I didn't see where Andy's comments to management included
checking out the reluctant TW's specific needs before reprimanding him.
Did anyone make sure that his work is typical of the client's other work
(not too large, must be portable)? Andy says "That personal preferences
about technology and tools will be met when appropriate, but the first
priority was producing good documents and good products."  Please tell me
how that happens if they start out by reprimanding the guy?

I admit, I'm a little touchy about Frame vs. Word right now. Twelve months
ago, a writer in another department was laid off. Her work was added to my
job. Six months ago, the other writer in my department quit. Guess what,
her work was added to my job. (The product is nearly in maintenance now,
we don't need two full-time technical writers. Yeah, right.) Hiring
another technical writer is not an option, so I've been trying to figure
out ways I can be more productive. One way would be having the right tools
for the job.

I use Word to create extremely complex documents (loaded with graphics,
callouts, special formatting). I can make Word sing, but I find it's
frequent crashes to be a real sour note. At home, I also have Framemaker.
On my own time, I created the same sample document (typical of those I do
at work) in both. The difference in my productivity was quite significant,
mainly owing to the fact that Word crashes whenever I try to add
cross-references and indexing to these complex files. Therefore, I have to
do it all manually. And, I have to update references manually with each
release. In Frame, I enter the references once and they work flawlessly
afterwards.

I wrote a recommendation report and gave it to the managers in both
departments that I support. They felt that Frame would more than pay for
itself in increased productivity. But, it was vetoed higher-up, because it
is not the standard. (Also, portability is a non-issue. I can't transfer
the files to other Word users now, because they're so printer dependent
that they aren't even viewable on other machines in the same office,
machines that supposedly have the same configuration.)

As things currently stand, I love my job. It's interesting and challenging
work. The people are smart, professional, and nice. The hours are
flexible. I'm only 6 blocks from my home. But, there are days when I
wonder how long I can keep my head above water.  Not having the right
right tool is more than an issue of "preference" it directly impacts my
ability to produce good documents.

Jill Burgchardt
jburgcha -at- pestilence -dot- itc -dot- nrcs -dot- usda -dot- gov